| Consumer Advice |
ESRB Rating: Teen (13+) Animated Violence
For parents, I don't think I'd
recommend Front Mission 3 to anyone under the age of 14 (especially if they prefer quick action games and don't care for the
techno-thriller plot). Not only does the game make very mature overtures about war and politics, but the story does get
to be very long and convoluted. Also worth noting for all is that this is one heck of a long game. The back of the CD
case brags that it provides 150 hours of gameplay in order to complete both senarios (which are surprisingly different
in terms of plot and characters). I, for the most part, concur with that timing. Hardcore strategy fans are going to find the
weak enemy AI (artificial intelligence) and loose tactical elements in Front Mission 3 to be a little too "lite."
Though there are ample oppuntunities at making personal configurations and modifications to a players team of Wanzers.
Role-playing game (RPG) fans and more casual gamers will be more at home with the less mentally intensive
approach to battles and the long-winded epic sweeping oh-so RPGish storyline. |
In the last decade, paperback novels, celluloid film and broadcast television in the United States have seen a
major upsurge in material vaguely classified by media critics as "techno-thrillers." This was largely due to the
writings of one man, Tom Clancy. Reputed as a former insurance broker turned author, Clancy pen several novels with
an absorbent amount of detail and in-depth knowledge of military hardware and their political underpinnings. These
novels, which include The Hunt For Red October and Clear And Present Danger, struck a chord with a
generation of readers and became so popular that film adaptations and television projects soon followed. Computer
games also followed suite and saw similar rises (mostly from Tom Clancy's own software house Red Storm
Entertainment) in the genre. Even the more traditionally adolescent targeted console market has seen more "techno-thrillers," and
this is no more apparent then in Squaresoft's release of Front Mission 3 (FM3) on the PlayStation.
FM3, at its core, is a turn-based strategy game where tactics and control are concerned only as far as
a squad of four soldiers rather then an army of thousands. What has always been a trademark of the Front
Mission series (Parts 1 and 2 were never localized for the North American market) is that all the soldiers
under a player's command pilot Japanese anime-styled combat robots known as Wanzers (pronounced Van-ser). Aside
from all the anime appeal, what really sets this particular title apart is the imaginatively complex story elements
(which unfold linearly in typical console role-playing game fashion in-between battles) and the way they are
executed with very Clancy-esque twists and turns. Not only are there two different storylines (which play out
depending on a seemingly harmless decision a player makes at the beginning of the game), but much of the details
are fleshed out in the game's Network feature (a self-contained Internet complete with pseudo email, mock Web sites
and hacker warez!). No matter how the story unfolds, government cover-ups, military espionage and conspiracies of
global proportions are all abound, and the lives of seemingly ordinary characters are put to the test in
extraordinary circumstances.
In that regard, FM3 is a game with high aspirations to which it lives up to, but barely. What makes it
such a close call is a few things. First, the actual characterizations of all the protagonists in the story fall
short. FM3 paints an incredibly vivid and believable vision of a future where nations are wrought with
internal as well as external conflicts (most of this is conveyed through the mock Web sites and reiterated in the
dialogue). Alliances with foreign countries often appear paper-thin, perceived threats of war seem to loom over
every government action and rival political parties are just itching for coup-de-tat at a moment's notice (is this
the future or present?). The histories and motivations of individual characters are interesting and believable
enough as well. It's just a shame that the speech and mannerisms of each character isn't always a fitting match
for the engrossing backdrop. Rather then getting a cast of emotionally charged characters and dialogue that reeks
of wore-torn bitterness and paranoia, we get a script that's sometimes about as deep and preachy as some of Steven
Segal's recent straight-to-video schlock. It's as though the person responsible for the back-end plotting and character profiles isn't the same person who wrote the screenplay and script.
The game's worst offender has to be the lead protagonist, Kazuki Takemura, who comes off immature—not by
design, but because he is so poorly written. His misguided attempt at locating his sister on a military base, and
the way he opposes military forces in doing so, early on the game is so ridiculous and improbable, that it nearly
ruins the credibility of the remainder of the game. Kazuki's continued quest to rescue his sister (when he doesn't
even know if she's in danger) turns into an all-out obsession and gets to be laughable as his single-mindedness in
locating her comically disrupts the dialogue in the most inopportune times and seems nonsensical amidst all the
international crisis. In all fairness, Kazuki represents an extreme on the negative side, and there are some other
characters that are worthy of praise, like Jose Astrada. His motivations and dialogue, which stem from him
indirectly, causing the death of his wife and child during a military operation, is not only powerful, but
consistent throughout one of the game's scenarios.
Another thing that hurt FM3 are peculiarities in the gameplay. FM3 is no different from most
turn-based strategy games in that players spend a great deal of time making preparations by outfitting soldiers
with weapons and equipment and then proceeding to a gridded battlefield where chess-like decisions determine the
outcome of a battle. For FM3, planning and preparation is comprised of scavenging, buying, selling, building
and configuring your own Wanzers to personal preference. On paper, that all sounds great, but I wasn't so enthused
by the final execution. It was extremely difficult to tell the strengths and weaknesses of one Wanzer model to the
next (unlike the MechWarrior series which separates mechs into classes) because displaying and navigating
informational stat windows proved to be too obtuse and difficult when it came to making such comparisons. Of course
it didn't help that despite having dozens and dozens of different Wanzers, most models were indistinct and fell
largely into two categories, powerful ones that could haul heavy artillery or mobile ones that were better suited for
assault weapons and hand-to-hand combat (something that would have saved me much time and headache if I had
realized it earlier).
My other gripe in the gameplay department deals with actual battle system. Most strategy games interject a high
degree of realism in simulating battlefield conditions and situations. This high degree of realism usually makes
the game more difficult to approach, but the end results are ultimately far more depth and satisfaction than other
styles of play. FM3 doesn't quite adhere to that philosophy in a number of ways, and I think the game is
lesser because of it. First of all, computer AI (artificial intelligence) doesn't behave realistically and is
tactically inept. Enemies will remain virtually stagnant until player-controlled characters reach within their
parameters. Groups of enemy Wanzers rarely function as team and do not capitalize on tactical advantages like
overwhelming the player with greater numbers. Even more out of whack are the Battle Skills. Along with gaining
experience points in battle, characters are often magically endowed with many different special abilities and
attacks known as Battle Skills. What's completely uncharacteristic of strategy games is that these Battle Skills
randomly activate under certain situations. So rather then give players the opportunity to plan their tactical
use—the very essence of what a strategy game is all about—the whole Battle Skill issue is left to what is
essentially pot-luck.
On top of the poor characterizations and strange peculiarities in the gameplay, I also found that despite
Squaresoft's valiant efforts in trying to squeeze every last bit of life out of PlayStation's rendering
capabilities, the graphical presentation in FM3 was still inconsistent and rather lacking. Some
prerendered CG (computer generated) cut-scenes littered through out and hand-drawn portrait artwork used
during dialogue were fine, but the 3D visuals rendered in real-time during story sequences and combat were
a whole other story. Severe amounts of problematic clipping could be spotted everywhere. Low polygon-count
models of humans were unbelievably ugly and animated with choppy stiffness. Perhaps the worst thing about the
graphics was the severe crookedness of straight textures in the environments (a problem commonly found in
older 3D graphics processors that don't have any perspective correction feature). I ordinarily wouldn't make
such a small technical quibble if it happened on rare occasions (like in Metal Gear Solid), but in FM3, I noticed the crookedness on many
occasions and it got to be a painful eye sore.
With all the negative comments that I've lobbied against FM3, readers may find it strange that I still
gave the game a rather positive rating. There's no mistake because I'm usually most vocal about games that fall
just shy of greatness. FM3 may have many faults, but there are many positives as well. I found the Network
feature to be a very unique approach and provided much needed diversity from a genre that is almost always
plagued with repetitiveness. The final integration of the Network to the actual gameplay isn't as tight as I
would have liked, but it still deserves recognition for being so comprehensive and convincing. Also, despite my
complaints against the idiosyncrasies of the characters and the unrealistic battle system, I was still impressed
with the story elements overall (especially the dual scenarios that feature surprisingly different missions,
characters and plot direction), and I was never bored with the combat aspect of the game. I devoted more time to
FM3 then any other game in recent months (over 60 hours, beating one of the two scenarios entirely), and
it's accurate to say that it captivated my attention. FM3 probably won't go down as one of all-time greats,
but it's certainly earns its stripes as a techno-thriller.
- Published May 2, 2000
Amazon.com Recommendations
Purchases made through these links help support this web site.
|